What are activities that you would associate with each enneagram variant?

What activities do you associate with each of the enneagram variants? Personally, this is how I see it:

Social activities:

-Building social contacts
-Working hard to establish one's place in the group
-Keeping track of what's going on in the world: celebrity gossip, world news, checking to see what's going on in your friends' and families' lives, etc.

Sp activities:

-Working
-Going to college to further ones education for career purposes
-Maintaining security
-Maximizing comfort
-Maintaining ones health

Sx activities:

-Bonding with close friends and family
-Actively searching for a mate
-Having sex
-Bonding with your significant other through quality time, sex, etc.
-Engaging in activities that you are passionate about and that are intense

Do all agree with these, and also please feel free to add more activities.

For ennegram 5s, there is only one answer, and that is masturbating into a bowl of corn flakes.

On topic here, I agree with the Sx activities. This is why I decided I was sx/sp rather than sp/sx, because I cared about most of those things more. Sx might also include art/movie-watching/music listening/food appreciation. It doesn't fit terribly well under the other two categories...

[Trump's] rhetoric is not an abuse of power. In the same way that it's also not against the law to do a backflip off of the roof of your house onto your concrete driveway. It's just mind-numbingly stupid and, to say the least, counterproductive. - Bush did 9-11

-Working
-Going to college to further ones education for career purposes-Maintaining security
-Maximizing comfort
-Maintaining ones health

...what would you classify the bolded as? I think I maximize my comfort by staying out of the rain and cold, wrapped up in a blanket and eating chocolate cake, but I am eminently certain I am not sp-first. I'd go into more detail for those.

That, and not all sexuals have sex. Other than that, it's a fair summary of the instincts.

"Bonding" is more of the social instinct. Searching for a mate can fall under social also - there are many motives in finding a mate that have more to do with social things or a sense of a "niche" with another person.
Sx instinct is more fickle - not about lasting bonds (on its own). It's more about "attraction" & "climax" than anything substantial. I think a lot of so-dom think they are sx-dom.

I find a lot of this too literal over all though. It's more like WHY someone does something, not what they actually do. Sp-dom can be more about maintaining independence than comfort or health, and they can engage in indulgence and recklessness, and generally not look very responsible. Unlike the sx drive, this is about CONTROL, whereas sx seems more about the engagement with some other force.

Often a star was waiting for you to notice it. A wave rolled toward you out of the distant past, or as you walked under an open window, a violin yielded itself to your hearing. All this was mission. But could you accomplish it? (Rilke)

...what would you classify the bolded as? I think I maximize my comfort by staying out of the rain and cold, wrapped up in a blanket and eating chocolate cake, but I am eminently certain I am not sp-first. I'd go into more detail for those.

That, and not all sexuals have sex. Other than that, it's a fair summary of the instincts.

About 99% of the sx doms that I have met are into sex. I mean, I guess if one was an sx dom and was repeatedly raped as a child, then they may not be that into sex, but they would still be into deep bonding with another individual. I believe that there is a strong correlation between sex and the sx variant because SX likes to get close to people fast, and what activity could be more intense and more intimate than sex? I mean really.

Originally Posted by OrangeAppled

"Bonding" is more of the social instinct. Searching for a mate can fall under social also - there are many motives in finding a mate that have more to do with social things or a sense of a "niche" with another person.
Sx instinct is more fickle - not about lasting bonds (on its own). It's more about "attraction" & "climax" than anything substantial. I think a lot of so-dom think they are sx-dom.

I find a lot of this too literal over all though. It's more like WHY someone does something, not what they actually do. Sp-dom can be more about maintaining independence than comfort or health, and they can engage in indulgence and recklessness, and generally not look very responsible. Unlike the sx drive, this is about CONTROL, whereas sx seems more about the engagement with some other force.

I don't agree with any of the bolded. I personally don't believe bonding to be a social activity at all. In fact, if you talk to many of the sp/so and so/sp people they will in fact tell you that it takes them a long time to get close to people and that their relationships often cultivate after elongated periods of time. In fact, most of the sp doms will in fact tell you that they keep people at an arm's length. However, if you talk to most of the sx doms they will tell you that they generally get close to people very quickly and many an sx dom can meet someone in a day and feel like they have known them their whole life.

Also, how can you possibly say that sx is not about lasting bonds? For instance, look at many of the Sx/sp people and they will generally tell you that they are looking for that one "perfect mate" that will complete them. I agree though, that sx/so bonds don't tend to be as long lasting.

About 99% of the sx doms that I have met are into sex. I mean, I guess if one was an sx dom and was repeatedly raped as a child, then they may not be that into sex, but they would still be into deep bonding with another individual. I believe that there is a strong correlation between sex and the sx variant because SX likes to get close to people fast, and what activity could be more intense and more intimate than sex? I mean really.

This applies to most human beings.

I don't agree with any of the bolded. I personally don't believe bonding to be a social activity at all. In fact, if you talk to many of the sp/so and so/sp people they will in fact tell you that it takes them a long time to get close to people and that their relationships often cultivate after elongated periods of time. In fact, most of the sp doms will in fact tell you that they keep people at an arm's length. However, if you talk to most of the sx doms they will tell you that they generally get close to people very quickly and many an sx dom can meet someone in a day and feel like they have known them their whole life.

Bonding quickly and lasting bonds are not the same thing. Consider the idea of "attracting" and "climax" again.

Also, how can you possibly say that sx is not about lasting bonds? For instance, look at many of the Sx/sp people and they will generally tell you that they are looking for that one "perfect mate" that will complete them. I agree though, that sx/so bonds don't tend to be as long lasting.

Because sx is frequently described as being fickle and leaving one stimulation that has grown dull in search of the next high.
So is about creating & sustaining niches with people, whether on a larger, social scale or more personal one. This does not have to be about social circles or work, but can include intimate relations with family & romantic partners.

No person is one instinct, so of course sx types are tempered by the so or sp instinct. Just as sx last for an so/sp can mean a person seeks niches which are comfortable & slow to build, not intense & quickly-formed (but perhaps quickly burnt out also). A lasting attachment does not mean depth or intensity anyhow, but many people seek some to cement the connection, even if intensity is not their main drive.

Your argument doesn't include great possibility of people mistyping & being mistyped. You have a circular reasoning here:
"My criteria for X classification is correct because the people I evaluated with said criteria & defined by said criteria fit said criteria". But if the criteria is wrong, then you have a problem with your classifications. The people may fit the criteria, but that criteria may not apply to that particular classification. If much of what you put under sx is really so, then all those people you type (or who self-type) as sx may simply be typed incorrectly.

The WHY is very important in typing people also. Similar behaviors can be engaged in for very different reasons.

Often a star was waiting for you to notice it. A wave rolled toward you out of the distant past, or as you walked under an open window, a violin yielded itself to your hearing. All this was mission. But could you accomplish it? (Rilke)

I don't agree with any of the bolded. I personally don't believe bonding to be a social activity at all. In fact, if you talk to many of the sp/so and so/sp people they will in fact tell you that it takes them a long time to get close to people and that their relationships often cultivate after elongated periods of time. In fact, most of the sp doms will in fact tell you that they keep people at an arm's length. However, if you talk to most of the sx doms they will tell you that they generally get close to people very quickly and many an sx dom can meet someone in a day and feel like they have known them their whole life.

Wouldn't so-doms be more concerned with their place within the framework of their group or culture on some level? If they live in an area that places more emphasis on pairing off and having kids, could such a "bonding" lifestyle be more important to them? I know many so-doms who are very happy with traditional, married life (and who would also appear to be starry-eyed romantics when compared to me). I don't actually have a solid opinion on this; just throwing it out there for consideration.

Originally Posted by The Great One

Also, how can you possibly say that sx is not about lasting bonds? For instance, look at many of the Sx/sp people and they will generally tell you that they are looking for that one "perfect mate" that will complete them. I agree though, that sx/so bonds don't tend to be as long lasting.

While I'm sure that's true for many of them, I think this ignores the (probably substantial) pool of sx-doms who are not seeking a soul mate, and who indeed may not even believe in such an idea. I think that's the area @OrangeAppled was getting at, and I would guess that it's just as common as the variety who need that perfect other person to "complete" them.

I think many sx-doms have a less idealistic approach, one that enables them to attract, attach, and let go more rapidly than might be expected of a hopeless romantic.

I tend to feel very anxious when a partner tells me he's "comfortable" in his relationship with me. I know that it's intended to be an expression of contentment, but for me, it's also foreshadowing the inevitable decay of attraction. Maybe that's my 7 talking, but I don't exactly feel compelled to stick it out for the long haul if we've already reached the apex of our excitement. In other words, I tend to fixate on energy, not so much on bonding (which I don't worry about, since I assume it will happen organically if the energy persists).

One could make the argument that the self-preservation in an sx/sp would foster a desire for the safety and comfort of, say, married life with the One, but I think it could also function in reverse. It's really about looking out for yourself first, controlling your own personal security. If you're more of a romantic, then sure, it might drive you to seek a soul mate. However, I'm sure there are plenty of sx/sp individuals who are just fine getting off and getting out, because it keeps them safe in a very different way.

Originally Posted by OrangeAppled

I find a lot of this too literal over all though. It's more like WHY someone does something, not what they actually do. Sp-dom can be more about maintaining independence than comfort or health, and they can engage in indulgence and recklessness, and generally not look very responsible. Unlike the sx drive, this is about CONTROL, whereas sx seems more about the engagement with some other force.

I agree! There is a lot of emphasis on what, not enough on why. Sx-doms can be workaholics if they're really into and strongly identify with their occupations, for example. (If one's work is only an act of bringing home the bread and butter, then this will probably not be the case.)

In fact, I think there's an excessive focus on sex and relationships insofar as sx-doms are concerned; it's true that sex is a huge slice of the pie, but the instinct to passionately fixate on anything tends to be ignored in favor of the idea that its main drive is relationships alone. It's about intensity, energy, chemistry. You can still have all of that without a soul mate on the agenda.

What particular aspect of this applies to most human beings specifically? That was a very vague statement.

Bonding quickly and lasting bonds are not the same thing. Consider the idea of "attracting" and "climax" again.

Well you have a point here. I almost see sx last bonds almost like Ned Stark and Lady Stark in "Game of Thrones". The two really didn't have chemistry in the beginning and slowly developed chemistry over time and eventually developed passion and feelings towards one another. While on the other hand, Sx last bonds tend to happen a lot slower than sx first bonds. Sx doms can damn near meet someone the same day and then be in love with them. While Sx last bonds can take months or even years to develop that sort of passion.

Because sx is frequently described as being fickle and leaving one stimulation that has grown dull in search of the next high.
So is about creating & sustaining niches with people, whether on a larger, social scale or more personal one. This does not have to be about social circles or work, but can include intimate relations with family & romantic partners.

But they aren't close, intense, and deep nitches like an sx dom.
@AntiheroComplex

Wouldn't so-doms be more concerned with their place within the framework of their group or culture on some level? If they live in an area that places more emphasis on pairing off and having kids, could such a "bonding" lifestyle be more important to them? I know many so-doms who are very happy with traditional, married life (and who would also appear to be starry-eyed romantics when compared to me). I don't actually have a solid opinion on this; just throwing it out there for consideration.

They would could go after relationships for social reasons as opposed to sexual reasons. However, they would be doing it in order to fit into the social mold and for reasons of social prestige rather than doing it because they were longing for intimacy or because they were finding someone to complete them. In addition, I also know people that are sx last that very happy with traditional, married life and I'll use my grandparent's relationship as an example. My grandmother and grandfather were both sp/so and both got married for security reasons. My grandfather was a business executive for a large motor company and was a private investor as well, and my grandmother was a stay-at-home mom. My grandfather would go out there and make all the money and provide the family with security, and the grandmother would raise the children. Both of the grandparents provided security for one another and both loved each other very much. However, they didn't bond right away, but eventually came to love each other. I noticed that their relationship never had much passion, or intimacy, but it had security and that's what kept them together, and they were very happy.

While I'm sure that's true for many of them, I think this ignores the (probably substantial) pool of sx-doms who are not seeking a soul mate, and who indeed may not even believe in such an idea. I think that's the area @OrangeAppled was getting at, and I would guess that it's just as common as the variety who need that perfect other person to "complete" them.

I think many sx-doms have a less idealistic approach, one that enables them to attract, attach, and let go more rapidly than might be expected of a hopeless romantic.

I tend to feel very anxious when a partner tells me he's "comfortable" in his relationship with me. I know that it's intended to be an expression of contentment, but for me, it's also foreshadowing the inevitable decay of attraction. Maybe that's my 7 talking, but I don't exactly feel compelled to stick it out for the long haul if we've already reached the apex of our excitement. In other words, I tend to fixate on energy, not so much on bonding (which I don't worry about, since I assume it will happen organically if the energy persists).

One could make the argument that the self-preservation in an sx/sp would foster a desire for the safety and comfort of, say, married life with the One, but I think it could also function in reverse. It's really about looking out for yourself first, controlling your own personal security. If you're more of a romantic, then sure, it might drive you to seek a soul mate. However, I'm sure there are plenty of sx/sp individuals who are just fine getting off and getting out, because it keeps them safe in a very different way.

I've heard this, and to me this is a truly ridiculous idea. Sx doms about 99% of the time (from what I have observed,) are constantly chasing after intimacy and relationships. Sx doms need someone to be close to, and they need someone to complete them. Now that special person may not be a lover, so to say, but they at least need like a very special friend or something to be close to. Sx needs to bond! I still say though, that the sx doms that don't need lovers nor relationships are as rare as the white siberian tiger though.

I agree! There is a lot of emphasis on what, not enough on why. Sx-doms can be workaholics if they're really into and strongly identify with their occupations, for example. (If one's work is only an act of bringing home the bread and butter, then this will probably not be the case.)

In fact, I think there's an excessive focus on sex and relationships insofar as sx-doms are concerned; it's true that sex is a huge slice of the pie, but the instinct to passionately fixate on anything tends to be ignored in favor of the idea that its main drive is relationships alone. It's about intensity, energy, chemistry. You can still have all of that without a soul mate on the agenda.

This is another thing that I always thought was total bullshit about sx doms: that they really need to be really passionate about their careers to get into them. Hell, I'm sure that there are several sx lasts that could easily say that they are passionate about their careers. This in no shape or form says anything about whether someone is an sx dom or not.

What particular aspect of this applies to most human beings specifically? That was a very vague statement.

Most of it, except wanting fast connections, perhaps.

Most humans are into sex & want close bonds with other humans, unless abused (or something) & even then they may still want the closeness.

But they aren't close, intense, and deep nitches like an sx dom.

For sx second I think they certainly can be. There are different way to be close & deep also. And my point about people injecting some intensity to stabilize bonds by deepening them stands. It may not be the focus for an sx last, and they may not get there easily or quickly, but it doesn't mean their life is kept devoid of it. I mean, even when sp or so is last, people still have to function in those areas too, if not at the very least to not have them interfere with our main drives.

They would could go after relationships for social reasons as opposed to sexual reasons.

This is too literal again.

However, they would be doing it in order to fit into the social mold and for reasons of social prestige rather than doing it because they were longing for intimacy or because they were finding someone to complete them.

Why do people seek prestige or to FIT a mold at all? Is that not the niche-seeking I spoke of? Perhaps they are not longing for intense intimacy, but maybe a kind which is comforting, which signals they have a FIT somewhere. Core type & Jungian type is always go to give some more of a one-on-one focus than a group focus, even if social first & sx last.

In addition, I also know people that are sx last that very happy with traditional, married life and I'll use my grandparent's relationship as an example. My grandmother and grandfather were both sp/so and both got married for security reasons. My grandfather was a business executive for a large motor company and was a private investor as well, and my grandmother was a stay-at-home mom. My grandfather would go out there and make all the money and provide the family with security, and the grandmother would raise the children. Both of the grandparents provided security for one another and both loved each other very much. However, they didn't bond right away, but eventually came to love each other. I noticed that their relationship never had much passion, or intimacy, but it had security and that's what kept them together, and they were very happy.

Yes - security, or a FIT or NICHE somewhere (and your grandparents sound like products of their generation). But I think some sx last might still want closeness as a sign of security. It's not about intensity than feeling connected in a comfortable way. These bonds are not all dry & dull. The so instinct can make people very playful and vibrant.

I've heard this, and to me this is a truly ridiculous idea. Sx doms about 99% of the time (from what I have observed,) are constantly chasing after intimacy and relationships. Sx doms need someone to be close to, and they need someone to complete them. Now that special person may not be a lover, so to say, but they at least need like a very special friend or something to be close to. Sx needs to bond! I still say though, that the sx doms that don't need lovers nor relationships are as rare as the white siberian tiger though.

We're back to square one & the circular reasoning.... Chasing after the initial high, yes, but motivation to sustain & feel completed (find a niche!!!) is more related to the more "stabilizing" so instinct. sp/sx and sx/sp are said to be the most fickle in relationships because of this (the push-pull).

Often a star was waiting for you to notice it. A wave rolled toward you out of the distant past, or as you walked under an open window, a violin yielded itself to your hearing. All this was mission. But could you accomplish it? (Rilke)

About 99% of the sx doms that I have met are into sex. I mean, I guess if one was an sx dom and was repeatedly raped as a child, then they may not be that into sex, but they would still be into deep bonding with another individual. I believe that there is a strong correlation between sex and the sx variant because SX likes to get close to people fast, and what activity could be more intense and more intimate than sex? I mean really.

I don't agree with any of the bolded. I personally don't believe bonding to be a social activity at all. In fact, if you talk to many of the sp/so and so/sp people they will in fact tell you that it takes them a long time to get close to people and that their relationships often cultivate after elongated periods of time. In fact, most of the sp doms will in fact tell you that they keep people at an arm's length. However, if you talk to most of the sx doms they will tell you that they generally get close to people very quickly and many an sx dom can meet someone in a day and feel like they have known them their whole life.

Also, how can you possibly say that sx is not about lasting bonds? For instance, look at many of the Sx/sp people and they will generally tell you that they are looking for that one "perfect mate" that will complete them. I agree though, that sx/so bonds don't tend to be as long lasting.

If that is the case, I am So/Sx, rather than So/Sp. I just have doubts about Sx becuase I aviod aggression and I tend to at least try and make decisions that will form a safety net I can use to e the ideal father in the future—close to my progeny, always present, warm, caring, cheerful, and fun. I wish to have children that will follow their own dreams, think their own thoughts…all while having a peaceful, cheerful home to fall back on in hard times.

I just couldn't jive with the idea of So/Sx taking such big risks…
I tend to calculate rather or not a move is worth it in the long run.

Of course, the lifestyle of a great author or artist still beckons to me. To settle the rift between my need for fulfillment and my need for fun and my need for security, I plan to teach high school. It will fulfill all three to some extent. I can create projects for the kids that let them be imaginative, I'll get summers off to be a family man/writer/artist, and I'll have a steady income to balance out the ups and downs of the art business.